This is a very good idea. You really don't have a lot to worry about. ASF projects can use GPL tools to build or do things like you are suggesting. However, we can't ship things that are under the GPL and should not commit them to svn. From what you are describing I don't think we would be doing that.
The log4j-dist module controls what is included in the release. As I recall it is already excluding some things so this be easy to do. However, the release zips the whole source tree, so as long as there is nothing GPL there we are good. Fwiw, my surgery is done. I am at home and feeling ok, under the circumstances. I can only see from one eye right now so please excuse mistakes. Sent from my iPad > On May 24, 2014, at 10:42 AM, Remko Popma <[email protected]> wrote: > > I've been using JMH (http://openjdk.java.net/projects/code-tools/jmh/ ) for > performance tests recently and I'm very impressed. JMH is developed by the > Oracle java performance team and used internally by Oracle to performance > tune the JVM and java core libraries. > > I would like to use JMH to start building a suite of performance tests for > log4j2. I would like everyone's thoughts. First, do you like this idea at > all? > > Also, there is one legal and one technical aspect that I would like > everyone's feedback on. > > A potential legal problem is that JMH is made available under GNU GPL v2 with > the Classpath Exception, and our Apache License v2 is not compatible with GPL > v2 (see http://www.apache.org/foundation/license-faq.html#GPL ). > > To solve this, I want to avoid distributing JMH or our executable > microbenchmarks (which would have the JMH classes) with our log4j artifacts. > I just want our team (and whoever checks out the log4j source) to be able to > use JMH to genyerate and run benchmarks when they want to. > > I'm not a lawyer though. Does anyone have experience with this kind of > question? > > The technical aspect: > I propose adding a log4j-perf module. This is where our performance test code > would live. JMH microbenchmarks are very simple java classes with > org.openjdk.jmh annotations. During the build, JMH generates code and that > generated code, together with all dependencies are zipped up in a large > uber-jar with the maven Shade plugin. You can then use java -jar > microbenchmarks.jar to run performance tests. > > To ensure that the log4j-perf artifacts are not included in the log4j2 > distribution, we could simply leave out the "<module>log4j-perf</module>" > line from log4j2/pom.xml. The drawback is that you'd need to manually add > that line and build again if you want to execute microbenchmarks to test > something that only exists in your workspace. Is there a better way, to > somehow include the log4j-perf module in the build, but exclude its artifacts > from the log4j2 distribution? > >
